Accidental Blogger

A general interest blog

On the 27th of January, while driving through Mozang (an extremely crowded section of Lahore city) in a rented Honda Civic, American citizen RaymondDavis shot two men who were riding a motorcycle.  Soon afterwards, another vehicle that was racing to (presumably) rescue Mr. Davis, ran over a third person and killed him too. These seem to be the only undisputed facts about the event.  Shortly afterwards, Pakistani TV channels showed one of the dead men with a revolver and an ammunition belt around his waist. It was also claimed that the two men were carrying several mobile phones and possible some other stolen items. But soon after the event, the story began to change. From a robbery attempt gone bad, it morphed into Mr. Davis assassinating two young men without obvious cause. Raymond’s own status was immediately in dispute and within a few days the network of websites that is thought to represent the views of Pakistan’s deep state were stating that Davis was a CIA agent, he was being tailed by the ISI and he had shot two ISI agents. They also claimed Davis was working with the “bad Taliban” to do bad things in Pakistan, while trying to spy on the “good Taliban” and other virtuous jihadist organizations like the LET.


Since then, the US has itself admitted that he worked for the CIA and relatively sober Pakistani military analysts have hinted that the two victims were ISI agents who had been tailing Raymond for over an hour.

Much is being made of these revelations, but to an outsider it seems obvious that his status cannot have been a surprise to the ISI.  You cannot have 5 CIA agents renting houses in Lahore and tailing people without the ISI knowing about it. Nor would it be a huge surprise to learn that a CIA agent was there under diplomatic cover; all countries get diplomatic status for their spies and if the host country does not like a spy, they can always kick him out by declaring him persona non grata.  The legal question revolves around whether he formally had diplomatic status or not, whether diplomatic status qualifies him for immunity once a truly serious crime has been committed, and what exactly happened in Mozang (was it an attempted robbery and therefore self-defense, or did he shoot two ISI agents, with or without provocation,  or were they terrorists, or something else?). 

Protest against davis But the strategic question is more interesting: why, after the event, did psyops organs of the deep state jump all over the case? Clearly, if he shot two robbers and the ISI did not want a fuss, they could have used their vast media resources to project exactly that story and he would have been out of there in no time. If he shot two of their men then the issue becomes more complicated, but at a strategic level, it remains Pakistan’s choice: whether to make it a huge issue or settle it quietly. Time will tell if the quiet option was dropped because of American ham-handedness and arrogance, or the ISI opting for confrontation. But it was clearly dropped and a very public confrontation was encouraged, with all the usual suspects in action. But to what end? Does the ISI want a divorce or is this a lover’s quarrel, to be made up after the CIA coughs up flowers and some new concessions? It seems the smart money is on the latter scenario (making up after a tiff, rather than an actual divorce). Pakistani friends whose opinion I respect insist that Pakistan has the US over a barrel right now and will get what it wants, then quietly let Raymond go, or arrange some other face-saving deal for all concerned.  But there is always the chance that carefully calculated operations can go awry. Even if the ISI only planned to push the CIA a little and get them to tone down some overly intrusive operations and get some concessions on India-specific Jihadis and other issues dear to their little hearts, the change in public and official opinion on both sides may not be turned on and off like a tap. They may have wanted to push to the edge and step back at the last moment (a skill at which theyconsider themselves great masters) but there is such a thing as “too much success”. One hopes they know what they are doing, but people who are old enough to remember 1971 and Kargil may be excused for feeling a little trepidation; this crowd has been known to overestimate their skills. The irony is, Kiyani sahib is probably the smartest man to ever hold that exalted position at the head of GHQ (and is an amazing genius compared to the last man in that position) and it will be sad to see things go south on his watch. And even if the US has no option but to cooperate, the extremism and anti-Americanism that has been fanned within Pakistan may one day come back to haunt them.

 When I wrote about “Pakistan predictions” last month, I got some flak from liberal friends for being insensitive and politically incorrect (too negative about certain third world groups, not enough condemnation of American imperialism). I promised to say more about this topic in this month’s piece. First of all, it is true that I assume that people in Pakistan have plans and ambitions of their own. I also assumes that the US is not some kind of God-like power. These assumptions run contrary to the kind of Eurocentrism that is commonplace in Western liberal academia and that assigns agency only to White people, while regarding Brown people as almost childlike victims of their superiors in the West (I am obviously being deliberately provocative in my choice of words…these are not the words which the liberals themselves would ever use about their beliefs, but I do feel that while these words are crude and inflammatory, I think they are still an accurate depiction of a certain mindset). But I think I will stick by those assumptions because I regard the fashionable Western (and Westernized) liberal view as being unconsciously racist and do not find their exalted opinion of imperialist prowess to be credible.

In addition there are also some specific delusions about Afghanistan and Pakistan that I think need to be confronted in this matter and I will try to explain my position about them a little.

  1. The Imran Khan delusion: this delusion holds that all was well in Afghanistan and Pakistan until America invaded Afghanistan in 2001 and upset the peaceful status quo.  According to this version of events the US and other powers got General Zia to arm and train Jihadist terrorists to fight the Russians in Afghanistan  (no Pakistani interest in this scheme is implied) and then left Afghanistan without building schools and hospitals in 1992. Then things sort of coasted along more or less peacefully for the next 12 years, until 9-11 (which is frequently believed to be a Mossad-CIA operation) happened. After this event, the US came and said “we want our old friends dead now”. Since then, Pakistan has been dutifully trying to kill these maniacs and the current Pakistani government in particular is trying its best to kill them and suffering vastly in the process, so it is unfair of the US to ask us to "do more". I think this version of events misses some crucial points.

 First of all, the jihadi project was indeed a CIA project, but it was also our project from the very beginning. America wanted Russia humbled in Afghanistan, but we wanted that humbling to be done by Islamist jihadis under our control. Our leaders (specifically Zia and Akhtar Abdul Rahman) also had the “vision” to see in this an opportunity to settle scores with India and plant the seeds of a wider area of influence in Central Asia, and so on and so forth. Second, after the CIA finished its dirty business in Afghanistan and left, “we” multiplied the jihadi infrastructure by 10. We redirected it to Kashmir and spread it throughout Pakistan. Of course the Westoxicated middle class had very little notion of what was going on. These were serious things, handled by serious people in the security establishment, not shared with the rest of the country except on a “need to know basis”.  But it is disingenuous to think the multiplication of jihadi militias throughout the nineties was also America's fault (though the US did ignore it, perhaps because they thought it improves their leverage over India, perhaps because they were busy with other things). Then, after 9-11 (which was not an inside job in my view, primarily because I see no reason to think that the US secret agencies are capable of such vast and successful deception), “we” (the Pakistani security services) protected good jihadis and failed to go after their indoctrination and finance pipelines because “we" wanted the infrastructure kept alive for future use against India.

  Colonel-Imam-former-ISI-officer-killed-543-Of course, even if the rickety state apparatus has decided to go all out against the jihadis, the process will be neither pretty nor quick. There is no simple way to put the genie back into the bottle. The half million who are already trained (Arif Jamal's figure in Shadow War) will have to be dealt with. Luckily, some have already moved on to other occupations and others have become simple criminals, busy with kidnapping and armed robbery.  But the more committed ones will have to be disarmed and jailed or killed and they are not easy targets. In fact, those with a strong stomach can watch this video to see that even the ex-Godfathers of the Taliban are not safe from their wrath. These are the Kharijis of today; they are not amenable to reason.  In any case, in order to stop them the state will have to shut down their financing, crack down on their above-ground supporters and win the battle of ideas in the mind of the public (and improve its functioning in general and make it less unjust, deficiencies it shares with India's rickety state). None of that can succeed if the state's own paid propagandists are busy spreading confusion and propaganda that undermines this effort. It will also not succeed if the army is simultaneously trying to protect assets it hopes to use against India (because the “good jihadis” don’t seem to understand the distinction and frequently help out the “bad jihadis”). It will also not succeed if Saudi and Gulf financing is not being intercepted. In short, it will not stop unless the India-centric, zero-sum national security mindset is changed because that mindset leads to these people and their mentors being protected. For proof of this, you need to look no further than Musharraf’s moronic interviews with Der Spiegel and theAtlantic council . In fact  Put those interviews together with Admiral Fasih Bokhari's article and you can see that the overgrown adolescents who are America's great white hope in Pakistan are perhaps more dangerous and deluded than the ball-scratching, nose-dripping, corrupt gangsters in the civilian political parties. But, military men being military men, no Pentagon general seems to be able to resist the sight of a man in a finely starched uniform, especially if he also likes whisky (the one sure sign of "enlightened moderation", if the diplomatic reports of the US embassy from the last 50 years are any guide).

I am aware that some people think that the primary reason this effort is not being conducted effectively is not because of any real or imagined Indian threat but because the existence of this insurgency is in fact our ticket to more aid and assistance. I personally think this is too conspiracy-minded, but who knows. Another factor to consider is the role of the Military-Mullah alliance in domestic Pakistani politics. i.e. the fact that the army uses the mullahs as muscle power against secularists, mainstream politicians and "pro-Indian" elements. And of course, some demented ideologically committed junior officers may find the jihadists useful against heretics like Shias and Ismailis and other "undesirables". The last category (I hope) is confined to the lower ranks. The senior officers are not so much jihadist, as they are limited in their imagination and hooked on India-hatred and US aid, and not necessarily in that order.  

 2. The romantic Left delusion.  This is the belief that Pakistan’s corrupt elite deserves to be overthrown by the lower classes and the Taliban are (an unfortunate but expected) instrument of this necessary revolution. Actually the first part of this delusion is not a delusion. The Pakistani elite is not just corrupt, they have been practically suicidal. Where other corrupt third world elites have mismanaged the state, provided poor governance, oppressed the poor and failed to evolve a stable political system, Pakistan’s elite (which in this case means the army high command and their supporters) have done something no other third world elite has managed. They have armed, trained and encouraged their own executioners in the course of a demented scheme of trying to wrest Kashmir from India while laying the foundation for a mini-empire in central Asia. But the second part of this delusion is the real delusion here. The Pakistani Taliban is not the Bolshevik party; in fact, they are not even the Iranian Mullahs. They were created by the army as an outgrowth of the American-sponsored Afghan jihad. Their leadership is derived from the Madrasahs and think tanks sponsored by Saudi money and inspired by Syed Qutb and the most virulent Wahhabi and Salafist clerics in the world. They were guided by the jihadist faction of GHQ, men inspired by Maudoodi and his children, not by Marx or even Ali Shariati. They have absolutely no workable social or economic plan. If they do overthrow the elite, what follows will be a nightmare of historic proportions. If the whole thing does not dissolve into anarchy, it will be stabilized by an army coup. After purging liberals and hanging Veena Malik, the dictatorship of the mullahtariat will degenerate into an Islamic version of Myanmar, not revolutionary Iran or Castro’s Cuba.

 So, coming back to our original topic: does the Raymond Davis affair reflect a lover’s spat or an impending divorce?  My guess is that its not a divorce. The US has few options and neither does Pakistan. We are probably in for more of the same, but with a chance that one of these days the ISI will find itself the victim of too much success and will not be able to pull back from the brink of divorce.  Meanwhile, when the only tool you have is a hammer, everything is a nail. So I expect the state department to pass out more money to GHQ, I expect the CIA to fund some new insane lunatic fringe to counter their last lunatic fringe, I expect the Pentagon to ask for more money for weapons and a good hard "shock and awe campaign", I expect professors in San Francisco to blame colonialism, and I expect Islamists to blow themselves up with even greater devotion. May Allah protect us from anything worse.

 Cia

(This article originally appeared on 3 Quarks Daily)  

Posted in , , ,

14 responses to “Lovers tiff, impending divorce or trial separation? (Omar Ali)”

  1. Omar, once again you offer much in the way of insight, and the need for reflection on middle Asian politics. Thank you.

    Like

  2. Omar, the stories of Pakistani political intrigue that you post are curiouser than Alice in Wonderland. Except, they are not as funny. I think the problem here is a deeply suspicious and paranoid nation (like Israel) which sees so many enemies and backstabbers all around that it has begun to jump at its own shadow. At the diplomatic Spy vs Spy level, many countries are given to cloak & dagger games to some extent. But Pakistan is straining at too many seams of its national fabric and the fear and paranoia have percolated well into the psyche of the general public, not just the “Deep State.” That is what is scary. Who is going to be the unifying leader who can assuage the fear and calm the nerves of all the disparate factions? Pakistan is not Hamas in Gaza, nor Hezbollah in Lebanon that scare Israel so much. A nervous and trigger happy Pakistan stands to do real damage well beyond its own borders. As for the US, of all the genies that it let out during half a century of the cold war machinations, Pakistan is going to be the toughest to put back into the bottle.

    Like

  3. A rather unlikely ‘what if’ question occurs to me : What if the US/CIA refuses to play ball with Pakistan and demands that Davis be repatriated without proffering any ‘kiss and make up’ gifts, being as it were that money flowing in could always be easily curtailed as part of the budget cuts that are already being proposed.

    Like

  4. omar

    Sujatha, to answer your question: the view in teh Pakistani elite is that the US has no choice. They are stuck in Afghanistan and need Pakistani help for a soft exit. They will not cut off aid for the sake of one contractor.
    Ruchira, about the murder of Shahbaz Bhatti: Today is the kind of day its OK to say a few things about the “ideology of Pakistan”, the so-called secular “father of Pakistan” and his confused Uncle Mohammed Iqbal. While Islamic supremacism (upon which modern Islamist fascism is being built) has always been with us, its been ONE of the strands in Islamicate culture, not the only one or even the most dominant one. While Kafirstan was turned into Nuristan, its worth noting that it also stayed Kariristan for centuries. The evil was always there, but it was not always this big. Thanks partly to the two-nation theory and Allama Iqbal’s visions of Islamic glory, it has grown in spectacular ways in the last century (modernization?) and Pakistan is at the center of it. There is a reason why the Jewish apostate Mohammed Asad settled in Pakistan (there is also a reason why his poco pomo son Talal Asad is now living in the West and making good bucks selling the usual stuff (http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/asad/), but that is another story), why the rabita al alamai al Islami (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_World_League) has had such a close relationship with Pakistan, why Pakistan is the world headquarters of Jihadism, and so on.
    Anyway, I am not saying Pakistan is unsalvageable. Its very hard to change borders in today’s world, so I expect that Pakistan too will stay one country. Its also very hard to be a completely rogue state without oil and feed 200 million people, so the elite will find some way stay away from the most extreme features of Islamist fascism (which would mean avoiding things like attempting a thousand year Islamic Reich and taking yourself and the region through total war before the inevitable defeat). Unfortunately, that does not mean the state also has to protect minorities or keep the various mad dog militias under tight control. In fact, the way the dynamic has developed, the elite will be handsomely paid to keep the mad dogs limited to Pakistan, India and Afghanistan, and naturally they will make sure they dont do too god a job and lose their nuisance value in the process.
    A friend from the PPP has predicted that the current regime is the Weimar republic, to be followed by an Islamist Hitler, spectacular improvement in economy and “law and order” and marching in fancy uniforms, and then..total war…in that depressing order. I hope he is wrong…

    Like

  5. Omar, that is a depressing scenario you paint. But I am not naive enough or cheerfully optimistic enough to deny that things may indeed unfold in that scary manner.
    I am struck by your mention of Mohammed Iqbal and his vision of Islam. I know that he is celebrated among Pakistani as well as Indian Muslims and also, some non-Muslims. Perhaps you will educate us as to Iqbal’s vision for Islam in general and Pakistan in particular.

    Like

  6. omar

    Iqbal was a very talented poet, probably the most talented Urdu poet of the 20th century but ideologically he was very confused. He came from a lower middle class family of neo-Muslims, who still had Hindu cousins and whose Islam was very orthodox and mullahistic. Being extremely intelligent and talented, he performed very well in college and people like Professor Arnold recognized his potential and encouraged him in the ways of modern European education. But he never lost a determination to use philosophy and poetry to justify his core beliefs. While a lot of his poetry (and especially his Persian poetry, with which I am not too famliar, but about which I hear from Persian speaking friends) is universal and uplifting; in his Urdu poetry he became more and more Jihadist with age. Probably because that is what got the loudest cheers from his fans. In any case, he shamelessly promoted (and possibly believed, which is worse) the notion that Islam constitutes a kind of unique world-altering, world shattering forward move in human history, completely and definitively superior to any other religion or ideology, and he proceeded to write some very fanciful odes to the conquering heroes of the golden age. Never mind that most of those heroes were no different from any other king, adventurer or conqueror of the age. He was also committed to Islamic supremacism and opposed secularism (at least when it suited him to do so…its hard to say what his real beliefs were or even if he had any in this matter)….anyway, it is no surprise that the martyrdom certificates issued by the Pakistani Taliban have one of his verses written on them…every madressa i have ever seen in Pakistan is adorned with verses of Iqbal.
    I am being a little unfair, but not much. The Sindhi leader GM Syed criticized Iqbal by saying that in this day and age, we expect our greatest intellectuals to be humanists and universalists. They are not parochial and bigoted. They dont regard any one race or ideology as the answer to all problems because they have a deep sense of the almost tragic oneness of mankind. We still have poets who write martial music or nationalist anthems or promote their own religious group over all others, but we also regard them as second-raters. Iqbal is too talented to be called second rate, but philosophically, he falls in that second-rate category..

    Like

  7. That explains the hint of arrogance in this largely unsung line from the iconic ‘Sare jahan se accha’
    “e āb-rūd-e gangā! vuh din haiñ yād tujh ko?
    utarā tire kināre jab kāravāñ hamārā”
    (Translation from Wikipedia)
    “O the flowing waters of the Ganges, do you remember that day
    When our caravan first disembarked on your waterfront?”
    It’s one of the stanzas never sung in the original version set to music, but I learned it at a music camp run by a well-known music director who tuned it, just for fun, and to subversively remind those of us who might understand of more agendas than plain jingoism.
    That’s all that I knew about Iqbal, until your clarifications put it all in clear perspective. Thanks, Omar.

    Like

  8. Dear Omar,
    I was horrified to read your sentence “Iqbal was a very talented poet, probably the most talented Urdu poet of the 20th century…”! I know nothing about his Farsi poetry, but in Urdu he is a dullard who cannot hold a candle to serious 20th century poets of Urdu like Josh Malihabadi or Faiz! He is celebrated for providing ideological justification for the two-nation theory. You seriously like his Urdu poetry? I can’t stand it at all!
    How’s that for opinionated comment-posting? :-)))
    Best,
    Abbas

    Like

  9. Abbas:
    Before Omar has a chance to respond, let me tell you that I for one, like opinionated comments, especially when they come from informed commenters. I am very unfamiliar with most modern Urdu poets except Faiz who was brilliant. Some of the Indian filmi poets like Kaifi Azmi and Sahir Ludhianvi wrote movingly also. The only poem of Iqbal’s (apart from Saare jahaan se achha) I can claim to have read with some attention was Shikwa and that being more a religious tract than poetry, it went pretty much over my head both intellectually and emotionally.

    Like

  10. omar

    Abbas, I specifically said “talent” not actual production. That’s a backhanded compliment in a way. But he did have talent. Even when he is writing jihadi drivel, its musical, its rhythmic, he has a vast vocabulary, he has memorable turns of phrase…I will go out on a limb and bet that you know more of his verses by heart than you know of Josh…and Josh was incredibly talented himself (besides being a much more progressive and emancipated thinker)…

    Like

  11. Okay, Omar, I see what you’re saying. And you are right, I could quote more Iqbal than Josh from memory, but then I can quote more Dr. Seuss than Shakespeare since it’s easier to remember! :-)

    Like

  12. The Pakistani prime minister has suggested that the US pay “Blood Money” as a compromise. But the Islamic groups angry with the US are not ready to buy into this compromise solution.

    Like

  13. This post says they have equipped, qualified and motivated their own executioners in the course of a demented structure of trying to wrest Kashmir from Indian while installing the groundwork for a mini empire in middle Japan. But the second aspect of this misconception is the actual misconception here.

    Like

Leave a reply to הגנה עצמית Cancel reply